-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Easy Allies |EZOT2| Love & Respect
- Thread starter Auctopus
- Start date
- Status
I did vote for Destiny 2 as well (although I wasn't a fan of the first one). The party game is fine with me as well (and that one will probably make it). I don't want to see FFXII as I never played it and I received my order this week. I don't know when I will play it, but I want to see as little as possible about it. FFXII is certainly the game of those 3 I am most interested in, but I guess that's why I don't really want to watch it being streamed at this moment.
The review and Frame Trap discussions were fine for me, but I don't want to see the first 2 hours of that game. If it does come to it, I will probably either not watch the stream or let it run in the background without watching.
That said, If it does win the vote, I am obviously fine with it. The reason the voting process exists is so the game that the majority wants wins anyway.
If I really don't like what I see/hear, I just do/watch something else (but I don't think that will happen).
LiquidSolid
Member
Okay then. XV is such a different thing that I'm not sure how well it'll help you get into older FF's but I'm coming from the perspective of having played JRPGs for over two decades (my first was Phantasy Star IV).
Though the FFVII remake will be a very different thing than the original, so I think it should be fine to play the original first.
Agreed.
No offence but to me, the "it's not genuine" argument always comes off as an excuse to complain about any moves for more diversity and I don't think it holds up logically. What even counts as "genuine"? If Chibnall (the new Who showrunner) went into this specifically wanting to cast a woman Doctor, is that not genuine? If anything, I think it'd actually be the opposite. They had to really be all in on casting a woman to deal with the inevitable backlash it would bring with it.
Regardless, no matter what went on behind the scenes, my perspective is usually that if the end is a good move, why should it matter what the means to that end were?
Hobbestetrician
Member
Why is it a trend or hokey to put a woman at the forefront of a franchise? Why does the situation have to be totally, 100% right for a woman to be the lead otherwise it should just revert to the default male?
This plus the L&R question about Overwatch toxicity ("just mute everyone, you can't make it better") speaks a lot to EZA's (and gaming media in general) lack of female perspective.
uomoartificiale
Member
Do you really think Don would settle for anything that is not just superb? Nah I don't think so.
Don in suit and fedora or bust!
Hey guys, I appreciate where you guys are coming from in the criticism of the tweeting today, and to be honest I really considered not responding because frankly I don't want to hijack the thread and make it about me. But a few of you expressed a genuine concern, I figured you deserve a reply.
First off, Twitter is a bad place to talk about basically anything. That was my real mistake.
Second, using the term "SJW" was basically just a lazy way to stay under a character limit, but it's also one of those finicky time-bombs that just attracts every type of attention under the sun these days. It's got a negative connotation for a handful of reasons, used by both extreme sides of the spectrum of people on both sides of this crazy war between sexes and sexists and insanity that has a whole lot of people caught in the middle, that'd just like to be happy.
I don't hate anyone. I don't go to Klan rallies. I don't secretly want a managerial position just so that I can make women's salaries lower and snicker about it on the golf course. I envision a World where people don't have to actually say that, but hey, we live in a bit of a crazy one.
Just so I don't ramble on for years on this, I will wrap up by saying that I'm sad to see Capaldi go, but Capaldi helped me to get excited for new Doctors and I'm pretty excited to see what Chibnall has in store too. I'll also be watching Attack the Block ASAP because the trailer looks awesome and I'd like to watch Jodie Whittaker in something that's not depressing as hell (Broadchurch).
I love you guys, sorry I made you worry. Sorry I made this thread about me for a bit. Just figured you deserved a response.
I think he means the trend of just telling a story solely because you want a female character, and then patting yourself on the back for it, or using it for attention because it's a trend.
When someone just tells a story that's natural, it shouldn't matter whether it's a male or female, black/white, etc.. If the lead is female, that's all well and good, but if the story is bad, then what was the point?
I appreciated Wonder Woman for that reason. So many stories (mostly TV shows lately) focus on "oh it's more difficult for her BECAUSE she's a woman", but Wonder Woman instead just told a fun story about a kickass woman (god) who saved the World and will continue to do so. When that sorta thing becomes more normal, and we don't have to focus on the fact that it's so rare to have it feel normal to have a good female lead, then we'll be where I want to be.
uomoartificiale
Member
Hi Matt, as whole nice response, thanks for chiming in. Just a heads up though: there's no "middle ground" trapped within 2 extremes using the term "sjw". There's just a particular group of people with a definite agenda, using the term with derogatory intent.
But I guess you already know that.
Next time, if you don't want to be identified with those groups, maybe refrain from borrowing their words, however pure your intentions may be.
Im sorry to have to agree because but it is something that I notice. And not that I'm expecting EZA to have that represented, I understand that. I love EZA so so much but I do wish Elyse was back with them. I am glad though that Ian as tried to interject some female perspective even if the more toxic viewers can't understand it and hate him for it, I appreciate it.
Oh there are lots of groups of people with very bad agendas, of course. I don't like to let those kind of people dictate how I live my life, but that's a whole other thing. On this we can agree: Use a term that has a lot of attention, then don't be surprised to get any kind of that attention in your face. I'm not surprised, just a little disheartened. Lessons learned, always keep on learning.
I really appreciate that you clarified things Blair and I also think you deserved a chance to do that.
Yeah I've said it here before, but I also miss Elyse. Also spot on about Ian, it's really awful how some of the "fans" treat him in comments and such.
Hobbestetrician
Member
This is all written from the perspective of a man. What if someone wants to write a story about a woman? So what? It gets attention BECAUSE there are so few female-driven stories.
Women should be allowed to have bad stories, just like men are, that is the point. What if Wonder Woman turned out to be trash? You think we would see many (any?) female superhero movies going forward? Their stories should be allowed to fail without the entire gender's representation riding on it. Women shouldn't need a bunch of men saying "yes, this story is worthwhile".
So that is why you see the "more difficult because she is a woman" stories. It is because the entertainment industry is run by men, women can rarely fail, and they have to deal with dumbfucks freaking out when a TV alien is a woman for a little bit.
And you can substitute any minority into the above and it would hold true.
Well, I am a man. So, that makes sense that my view comes from there. But your tone seems to suggest that because of that, my view is either bad or generic. Admittedly a lot of my comments probably are those things anyway, but hey.
The hypothetical on if Wonder Woman was bad, I think we're kinda on the same page. If it was bad because all it did was make it seem like women are intrinsically less capable, then that would've been outrageously terrible for the reasons we all agree shouldn't happen. If it was just a bad movie because the story sucked or the editing was bad, then it wouldn't have been because it was a female lead. It's just better for everyone that everything ended up being good. It moves things forward, and we got a kickass movie to watch out of the deal. Yay!
Not the entire industry is currently run by men. There are plenty of professional women that do their jobs admirably already. Making blanket statements like that feels like doing them a disservice. That said, I would submit to you that basically all industries' momentum (including video games) was forged by men, from a male perspective, and drove those industries to where they stand today. That sorta thing leaves a lot of legacy "well this is just how it's always been" sort of behavior. That sorta thing needs to keep breaking. It is happening, for sure, and every time we get a female director, female lead that gets it 'right', we get one step closer to it not being an eye-opening moment or a surprise. I've worked in a few environments where this was already the norm. We want it to just be the norm, everywhere.
This reminded me of what Maren Ade the director of Toni Erdman said at Cannes.
Full article here http://www.vulture.com/2017/06/maren-ade-women-need-to-be-able-to-make-bad-films.html
Discussing female representation shouldn't honestly bother you that much. Just skip those posts. EZA covers games and even some movies/tv, so this is even related to them.
I do appreciate this point as well. The higher risk at failure definitely seems like a much bigger setback for women in general than any man, especially when you consider a crucial role like a film director.
I really hope that this is another trend that burns out fast rather than fades away.
Bloodworth
Member
I didn't say or intend to imply anything like that. I grew up looking up to strong female characters alongside strong male characters - Nausicaa, Samus Aran, Terra from FF VI, Storm from the X-Men, Captain Janeway on Star Trek Voyager. I wouldn't want any of them being re-cast as men either. And I know women who are more bothered by the Doctor Who change than I would ever be.
My bad. I did a thing.
uomoartificiale
Member
Sorry for insisting on this Matt, but all this fine reasoning, and you ended up using "sjw" on twitter and later came here with that weaksauce caught in the middle excuse? Come on man, you're better than that.
Everyone here clearly enjoyed your work at gametrailers, and I loved hearing from you on the podcasts. I always thought that you were trying to be too much the contrarian all the time but, hey, someone must be, am I right? Keep being critical and contrarian and passionate, and all the other things you are, just throw that other shit out, it doesn't suit you and you don't need that to explain yourself.
I hope to hear soon about your projects, come and visit the allies for an update!
N° 2048
Member
Hmm, you're right. That's on me, my bad. l&r
Hah, I wouldn't presume to make excuses. But I appreciate the criticism, and the regard you have for me.
And for the record, I didn't enjoy being contrarian. I was always frustrated at my tone after recording the podcasts. No regrets, though.
You were right about Hitman though I think, the episodic model does work for the game. Many people aren't just willing to give that a chance. And atleast it's a great game, even if people won't agree about the model. And having a contrarian in a discussion is a plus to me, makes people debate and explain themselves better. Much more interesting than listening to an echo chamber and it can make the listener challenge their own views too and put some thought to it.
It was awesome to have you on GT time though. You being the only person who was saying Hitman might be good while the rest of the GT crew being in complete disagreement was a great moment, especially in restrospect as we know how Hitman turned out.
I think both of the following are equally valid:
- I'm using a female character because the story/message I'm conveying requires it or is most natural with it.
- I'm using a female character because the industry needs more of them, this could help carry the momentum of a positive change, and a female is equally fitting to the story as a male would be.
It seems like you're criticizing the second one, but I don't understand what fault can be found in that motivation. Yes, if we had a situation where a male was replaced with a female when it doesn't make sense, but I don't know of any instances where that has happened. Football players in Last Chance U aren't being replaced with females for instance.
Don't wanna nitpick your posts too much Blood, just a heads up that is gonna be read the wrong way.
I don't think that's so much of a problem as : I'm making this character a female one and because I'm doing so I am so awesome, and I want everyone to know how awesome and progressive I am.
There's nothing wrong with having a female or a male main character. There is something wrong with people saying "hey look at us, we've got a female character, aren't we progressive". If you want to tell a story with a male or a female character because it's the best fit for the story go ahead. If you think the industry needs more female role models and so you want to have a female role model, go ahead. But don't come in, changing your character from male to female or female to male just cause you can go on the stage and say "look how diverse we are" or "look this character will totally vibe with the 14 year old boy market demographic".
Example: FFXIII changed Fang's gender from male to female as the creators felt the party needed more female members to tell the story that they wanted to tell. Her relationship with Vanille was even kept in a game, thus making the two the first two lesbian party members and playable characters in an FF game. But you didn't have Square standing up on the stage and shouting "look at us, we even had a male character and we changed him cause we're inclusive. Aren't we just awesome."
Ok, but when does that ever happen? Maybe it has at some point, but for the most part no-one publicly congratulates themselves for having a female character.
It seems like just making up a non-existent problem to be upset about. And even if someone did do that, it's such an incredibly small price to pay for females to become a little less marginalized in male-dominated industries.
Everytime a developer explicitly states that their character is strong, or how they wanted a strong character etc.
I think we've reached a point in the industry where developers are no longer restricted by marketing in making a lead character male for the sake of selling well. We're getting games like the new Uncharted, Horizon, Nier, Dakrsiders or TLOS 2 where no one bats an eye that the main character is female. And that's the way it should be, the main character who is whomever the developer wants not whoever the fans want or the marketing team want.
...So people are offended when women are stated to be strong? And sexism is now resolved in the gaming industry?
Sometimes I just am left at a loss for words. :/
i'm conflicted. on the one hand, i fucking hate the "finally! its time!" comments. which implies casting a female lead has nothing to do with storytelling or character development. its about something else. like we've been waiting for gender equality on already established characters. if you've got a story to tell with a female lead, fucking tell a story with a female lead. be creative. come up with a story. its not that fucking hard. but we're in this weird period of reboots, rehashes, and recasting. so i'm skeptical on the motives behind the casting.
on the other hand, we dont fucking know what theyre gonna do. it could be interesting and reinvigorate a tired formula. i just hope theyre doing it for storytelling purposes and not to appease one of the weirdest fucking fanbases of all time.
also, the sjw's need to fucking calm their tits whenever someone gives an opinion they disagree with. theyre experts at nitpicking offence out of innocuous sentences. its tiresome.
on the other hand, we dont fucking know what theyre gonna do. it could be interesting and reinvigorate a tired formula. i just hope theyre doing it for storytelling purposes and not to appease one of the weirdest fucking fanbases of all time.
also, the sjw's need to fucking calm their tits whenever someone gives an opinion they disagree with. theyre experts at nitpicking offence out of innocuous sentences. its tiresome.
...What? I'm not sure if you're referring to Dr Who fans, or fans of females. If the former, it seems like a good thing to make fans of show happy. If the latter... again I say, what?
I know, it's a tough world out there for people who have to endure hearing about equality happening.
Now to wait for the "triggered" comment or whatever.
Grayfox341
Member
Just Gundam VS, which continues to be fun. Never played Under Night.
LiquidSolid
Member
Just because there's a handful of major games with female protagonists these days, doesn't mean everything is right in the world and we should stop pushing for more diversity. They're still a small island in a sea of white dudes.
how could you think i'm referring to anything but dr who fans? like i said. some people are experts at nitpicking offence out of innocuous sentences.
he's not saying that there shouldnt be more female leads. he's saying that its possible to tell original stories with original female characters without just taking established characters and switching their gender on and off.
why are you guys being so obtuse? i dont think anyones even been totally against the recasting either. just cautious.
It was confusing because you made it sound like the fans were asking for a female lead, and that it would be bad if the writers gave them that. Contextually the statement made more sense if you were saying "SJWs" were the ones being appeased.
Still don't get what the issue is though if fans actually did want a female lead. I know you don't want to just bend to the whims of fans all the time, but in this case it seems like a very reasonable thing to ask.
Spiritreaver
Member
Show creators make an overarching villain a woman. Not a peep.
Show creators make the companion a lesbian. Not a peep.
Show creators make the main character a woman. HOLY FUCKING SHIT BALLS WHY
Where the fuck were you people being upset about The Master getting a regeneration into a woman in the god knows how many seasons she's been around? It's exactly the same concept.
But no, now it's an issue. Despite the show poking fun at the Doctor regenerating into a woman multiple times in NuWho.
It's forced guys. Totally forced. There's no reason the show could have done this without pushing an agenda. God forbid they decide to completely rejuvenate the show with a new doctor, new creative team, and new concepts.
Nah though, it's forced and just a kneejerk reaction to an agenda. I'm certain the character will not have any growth or be interesting because it's just a one dimensional pandering to those evil SJWs. I know this because I've seen all the episodes of Doctor Who starring Jodie. They're awful.
Christ almighty. Stop being so fucking "triggered" just because creators of any media decide to do something fucking different for the sake of being different. THAT IS AN OKAY THING. No matter if they're changing a series to be in fucking space with aliens, or the main character is black instead of Indian, or they decide to create a game about Assassin's Creed starring animals rather than people.
I hate to rant in this thread. I rarely post or rant on these forums lately at all. But there's some grade A bullshit here.
EDIT: Sorry for the cursing and aggressive tone, but some posters here aren't showing the same respect to others.
Show creators make the companion a lesbian. Not a peep.
Show creators make the main character a woman. HOLY FUCKING SHIT BALLS WHY
Where the fuck were you people being upset about The Master getting a regeneration into a woman in the god knows how many seasons she's been around? It's exactly the same concept.
But no, now it's an issue. Despite the show poking fun at the Doctor regenerating into a woman multiple times in NuWho.
It's forced guys. Totally forced. There's no reason the show could have done this without pushing an agenda. God forbid they decide to completely rejuvenate the show with a new doctor, new creative team, and new concepts.
Nah though, it's forced and just a kneejerk reaction to an agenda. I'm certain the character will not have any growth or be interesting because it's just a one dimensional pandering to those evil SJWs. I know this because I've seen all the episodes of Doctor Who starring Jodie. They're awful.
Christ almighty. Stop being so fucking "triggered" just because creators of any media decide to do something fucking different for the sake of being different. THAT IS AN OKAY THING. No matter if they're changing a series to be in fucking space with aliens, or the main character is black instead of Indian, or they decide to create a game about Assassin's Creed starring animals rather than people.
I hate to rant in this thread. I rarely post or rant on these forums lately at all. But there's some grade A bullshit here.
EDIT: Sorry for the cursing and aggressive tone, but some posters here aren't showing the same respect to others.
they should do it if they have a story to tell about a female doctor who. not because a section of the fanbase who are motivated by reasons beyond storytelling managed to yell loud enough on the internet.
the fact that you guys will twist words to fuel agendas just adds to the trepidation. matt's message was to give the female doctor time. that it was the 'good' that you take with the 'bad'. yet some people are talking in all caps about a-grade bullshit like matt said he hates women and is losing his shit over the decision. its mental.
Spiritreaver
Member
So what story do they have to tell? You seem to know more about what was shown today than anyone else. AFAIK they didn't even had dialogue in the reveal trailer, but hey.
Spiritreaver
Member
And yet, you're the one triggered over someone using caps and the word bullshit.
FWIW my post wasn't directed at Matt, Blood, you, or anyone. It was a general rant in response to the tone of some posts here. It's the same bullshit arguments that keep me from experiencing awesome LGBT chars in gaming. It's frustrating, it's tired. Sometimes people like me actually want to genuinely enjoy some games we can relate to.
So of the three types of stories
- requires male lead
- gender doesn't matter
- requires female lead
I don't think it makes much sense that 14 times in a row it was only possible for a man to have a good story. Especially when "gender doesn't matter" applies to at least 80% of stories in modern media.
And no one is twisting words or going mental here. If anything you're using more abrasive language than anyone else.
Honestly so am that that's what you took from my post. It's honestly stupidly annoying how people on GAF overreact on this topic instead of holding a proper conversation.It's like people want to be outraged.
What I did say is when a developer starts trumpeting that their character is the "tick the boxes" strong female character that it goes over the top. It's like saying your game is an esports game before the game releases. Let the players determine if she is indeed a strong female character. I would equally be pissed if a developer gets up on a stage and starts talking about how awesome and kick ass this random new bald marine number 34232 is in their game.
Never said sexim was resolved in the gaming industry because sexism is much more than just a token lead character. But go ahead and infer from comment what you want.
Honestly, this gen has been much better about diversity than the last gen. That is why I'm saying we're at a good place. No need to jump to conclusions, man.
What we need is creative freedom. If the developer feels like they want to create a game with a gay main character then do it, if they want to make a female main character then do, if they want an African main character do it, if they want a Chinese main character then do, if they want a transexual main character then do it and if they want a white male main character then do it. People should tell stories they want to tell. It is up to you whether you want to support them or not and that is how you vote. But let's not pretend that twitter hastags and monthly thread on gaf is "pushing" anything.
I think what lucha is annoyed by is the tokenism of it (though I do not know a thing about Doctor Who). Like it's the "Thor is now a woman!!!!" thing that Marvel did a couple of months back. Thor being a woman for a while is not diverse or progressive, having an awesome new female superhero with her own origin story, her own villains, her own convictions etc. That is what I'd classify as diverse and progressive.
Like if they made a Witcher 4 and Geralt was a woman because magic it'd be stupid. If they mdae Witcher 4 where you play as Ciri or say some new female character I'd be so damn hype.
Spiritreaver
Member
This is more or less how I feel. I think creative freedom should be there. That's why I find requirements that only X characters can be used if they have a proper "story to tell" or assuredly not pandering bizarre. It's often the same people saying that that also puppet "creative freedom".
I don't get upset when the lead character is a white male. I know others don't share the same sentiment, and I don't speak for them. I may be disappointed at times sure, but I will still enjoy and love a game with said characters. I have been. I just find it absurd when there's a similar backlash when the other side of the spectrum occurs.
Gaming and other media in general, has, and is, getting a lot better with creating interesting stories with a diverse set of characters. I just worry this current backlash in the gaming community is going to lead us to backtracking some awesome strides being made in the industry.
- Status